Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Article 50 can’t be invoked, surely, without the country knowi

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited December 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Article 50 can’t be invoked, surely, without the country knowing whether its revocable or not

David Davis tells MPs govt doesn't know if Article 50 process can be stopped once it starts – whether its 'revocable'

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • PaulyPauly Posts: 897
    edited December 2016
    The thread is nonsense. You can easily invoke Article 50, if the electorate in the future wants to rejoin the EU then that is still possible (via the accession process, like any other independent country) whether or not the invocation can be reversed or not.

    Arguably going to WTO is a better negotiating threat than revocation, which may be what many federalists in the EU secretly want. It could also give an incentive for them to give us a terrible deal so we revoke article 50.

    You've not thought this through Mike.
  • Did we know whether it was revocable when we signed the treaty binding ourselves to its terms? That, surely, was the time to understand what we were signing up to. Address any complaints to one Gordon Brown.

    For the current circumstances, I don't really see the problem. We just assume it's not revocable.
  • These desperate legal delaying tactics are pretty pathetic, aren't they?
  • Let's be honest what David David does know won't exactly fill a warehouse
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,545
    You invoke Article 50 to leave the EU, which is what we voted for. Absent a change of mind on the part of the public, we'll have to go through with it, even though it was a poor decision. Revocability is neither here nor there.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    @Pauly: There is a difference between joining as a new member and revoking Article 50 so that we stay on existing terms.

    I'm not clear why the legal action re the revocability of Article 50 is being bought in the Irish courts.

  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited December 2016
    'A50 can’t be invoked without the country knowing whether it’s revocable or not'.

    Sorry, but this is utter twaddle imho.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    Cyclefree said:

    I'm not clear why the legal action re the revocability of Article 50 is being bought in the Irish courts.

    Because they need a pretext to get it referred to the ECJ.
  • Why not?

    Mr. Walloper, welcome to PB.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,723
    Methinks Mike is an excellent Angler.
  • 'A50 can’t be invoked without the country knowing whether it’s revocable or not'.

    Sorry, but this is utter twaddle imho.

    Why? This is the strategy Boris proposed in 2015.

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/06/28/schrodingers-referendum-as-boris-wants-voters-to-vote-yes-and-no-to-leaving-the-eu/
  • These desperate legal delaying tactics are pretty pathetic, aren't they?

    Indeed Mr walloper – and welcome to PB.Com.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535
    Cyclefree said:

    I'm not clear why the legal action re the revocability of Article 50 is being bought in the Irish courts.

    The mere fact that Irish courts have even the slightest relevance — if they truly do — is a good enough reason to leave the EU in my book. It's abundantly clear now that nobody has ever given any serious thought to how the EU can be left or its grip loosened. I will take any form of exit now, just get it done ASAP, we will live with the consequences.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    I doubt we'll wait for the ECJ to opine on the matter.
  • No need to know the answer - we are leaving
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    glw said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I'm not clear why the legal action re the revocability of Article 50 is being bought in the Irish courts.

    The mere fact that Irish courts have even the slightest relevance — if they truly do — is a good enough reason to leave the EU in my book. It's abundantly clear now that nobody has ever given any serious thought to how the EU can be left or its grip loosened. I will take any form of exit now, just get it done ASAP, we will live with the consequences.
    Many Leavers seem to be opposed to constitutional government full stop.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,545
    glw said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I'm not clear why the legal action re the revocability of Article 50 is being bought in the Irish courts.

    The mere fact that Irish courts have even the slightest relevance — if they truly do — is a good enough reason to leave the EU in my book. It's abundantly clear now that nobody has ever given any serious thought to how the EU can be left or its grip loosened. I will take any form of exit now, just get it done ASAP, we will live with the consequences.
    One of the ironies of Brexit is that we will be more entangled in dealing with the EU as we leave and after we leave than we did as members. It will be frustrating for anyone who voted Leave because they don't like the EU much and wish it would go away.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited December 2016

    'A50 can’t be invoked without the country knowing whether it’s revocable or not'.

    Sorry, but this is utter twaddle imho.

    Why? This is the strategy Boris proposed in 2015.

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/06/28/schrodingers-referendum-as-boris-wants-voters-to-vote-yes-and-no-to-leaving-the-eu/
    I don’t give a damn what Boris Johnson MP said back in June.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    edited December 2016
    FF43 said:

    glw said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I'm not clear why the legal action re the revocability of Article 50 is being bought in the Irish courts.

    The mere fact that Irish courts have even the slightest relevance — if they truly do — is a good enough reason to leave the EU in my book. It's abundantly clear now that nobody has ever given any serious thought to how the EU can be left or its grip loosened. I will take any form of exit now, just get it done ASAP, we will live with the consequences.
    One of the ironies of Brexit is that we will be more entangled in dealing with the EU as we leave and after we leave than we did as members. It will be frustrating for anyone who voted Leave because they don't like the EU much and wish it would go away.
    I'm sure most leavers will be fine with the EU existing over there.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn confirmed to senior Labour MPs tonight that Sinn Fein staffer Jayne Fisher will be working in his office from next month.
  • FF43 said:

    glw said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I'm not clear why the legal action re the revocability of Article 50 is being bought in the Irish courts.

    The mere fact that Irish courts have even the slightest relevance — if they truly do — is a good enough reason to leave the EU in my book. It's abundantly clear now that nobody has ever given any serious thought to how the EU can be left or its grip loosened. I will take any form of exit now, just get it done ASAP, we will live with the consequences.
    One of the ironies of Brexit is that we will be more entangled in dealing with the EU as we leave and after we leave than we did as members. It will be frustrating for anyone who voted Leave because they don't like the EU much and wish it would go away.
    It will also be frustrating for the EU if indeed the EU remains unchanged which seems unlikely with the increasing anger towards it across Europe.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn confirmed to senior Labour MPs tonight that Sinn Fein staffer Jayne Fisher will be working in his office from next month.

    Wow!
  • Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn confirmed to senior Labour MPs tonight that Sinn Fein staffer Jayne Fisher will be working in his office from next month.

    As my wife just said 'traitor'
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,545
    RobD said:

    FF43 said:

    glw said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I'm not clear why the legal action re the revocability of Article 50 is being bought in the Irish courts.

    The mere fact that Irish courts have even the slightest relevance — if they truly do — is a good enough reason to leave the EU in my book. It's abundantly clear now that nobody has ever given any serious thought to how the EU can be left or its grip loosened. I will take any form of exit now, just get it done ASAP, we will live with the consequences.
    One of the ironies of Brexit is that we will be more entangled in dealing with the EU as we leave and after we leave than we did as members. It will be frustrating for anyone who voted Leave because they don't like the EU much and wish it would go away.
    I'm sure most leavers will be fine with the EU existing over there.
    But are they OK with arguing about every damn little thing? Believe me, that's what's going to happen.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    FF43 said:

    RobD said:

    FF43 said:

    glw said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I'm not clear why the legal action re the revocability of Article 50 is being bought in the Irish courts.

    The mere fact that Irish courts have even the slightest relevance — if they truly do — is a good enough reason to leave the EU in my book. It's abundantly clear now that nobody has ever given any serious thought to how the EU can be left or its grip loosened. I will take any form of exit now, just get it done ASAP, we will live with the consequences.
    One of the ironies of Brexit is that we will be more entangled in dealing with the EU as we leave and after we leave than we did as members. It will be frustrating for anyone who voted Leave because they don't like the EU much and wish it would go away.
    I'm sure most leavers will be fine with the EU existing over there.
    But are they OK with arguing about every damn little thing? Believe me, that's what's going to happen.
    For a few years, yes.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    edited December 2016
    If A50 was revocable then Brexit negotiations would have already started as the UK would be free to change it's mind at any time if it didn't like the deal on offer.

    As the EU keeps on reminding us,no negotiations can start until after A50 ,unless the EU bureaucrats have been telling porkies
  • Article 50 has to be irrevocable otherwise there would be nothing to stop the UK or any other country invoking and revoking it on a regular basis to gain leverage in negotiation. The main problem is that it enjoins the EC to "negotiate", not necessarily "in good faith".
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Have any experts given their view on this, especially on which part of the treaty suggests it is revocable?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,545

    FF43 said:

    glw said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I'm not clear why the legal action re the revocability of Article 50 is being bought in the Irish courts.

    The mere fact that Irish courts have even the slightest relevance — if they truly do — is a good enough reason to leave the EU in my book. It's abundantly clear now that nobody has ever given any serious thought to how the EU can be left or its grip loosened. I will take any form of exit now, just get it done ASAP, we will live with the consequences.
    One of the ironies of Brexit is that we will be more entangled in dealing with the EU as we leave and after we leave than we did as members. It will be frustrating for anyone who voted Leave because they don't like the EU much and wish it would go away.
    It will also be frustrating for the EU if indeed the EU remains unchanged which seems unlikely with the increasing anger towards it across Europe.

    It will be frustrating for the EU side too. Yes.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Article 50 has to be irrevocable otherwise there would be nothing to stop the UK or any other country invoking and revoking it on a regular basis to gain leverage in negotiation.

    We did this to death.

    Revoking gains zero leverage
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited December 2016
    Hmm on first blush I have to say why on earth does it matter if it's revocable or not?

    Change our mind (horrific as that might be in terms of the deal we would get) and we can rejoin at any time plus, if we did change our minds, and if it was put to the EU27 that we wanted to reverse our position I'm sure there would be unanimity in accepting.

    So not an issue IMO.

    Even if we changed our minds, the EU27 accepted, and they reinstated Dave's Deal, I would find it challenging to be in favour of rejoining but perhaps that is a pride thing, together with the view of the EU27 that we would be an unreliable partner.
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn confirmed to senior Labour MPs tonight that Sinn Fein staffer Jayne Fisher will be working in his office from next month.

    2/1 he is next leader to go?
  • Did we know whether it was revocable when we signed the treaty binding ourselves to its terms? That, surely, was the time to understand what we were signing up to. Address any complaints to one Gordon Brown.

    For the current circumstances, I don't really see the problem. We just assume it's not revocable.

    Indeed. The Rubicon was crossed on June 23rd, so this header is nonsense.
  • Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn confirmed to senior Labour MPs tonight that Sinn Fein staffer Jayne Fisher will be working in his office from next month.

    This move by Corbyn appears to be designed to antagonise the few remaining Blairite MPs.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn confirmed to senior Labour MPs tonight that Sinn Fein staffer Jayne Fisher will be working in his office from next month.

    *The sound of Keir Starmer and Clive Lewis slapping their heads in exasperation.*
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Meanwhile in Scotland...

    @scottishlabour: Tonight, SNP ministers who campaigned against austerity voted with the Tories to block a 50p top rate of tax for the richest few.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn confirmed to senior Labour MPs tonight that Sinn Fein staffer Jayne Fisher will be working in his office from next month.

    What next? A Hamas member as his diversity officer, maybe.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Scott_P said:

    Meanwhile in Scotland...

    @scottishlabour: Tonight, SNP ministers who campaigned against austerity voted with the Tories to block a 50p top rate of tax for the richest few.

    Too afraid to use their tax-raising powers? Better to just moan about it and blame Westminster.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074

    Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn confirmed to senior Labour MPs tonight that Sinn Fein staffer Jayne Fisher will be working in his office from next month.

    This move by Corbyn appears to be designed to antagonise the few remaining Blairite MPs.
    One would hope that it would antagonize more than Blairite MPs. It should annoy anyone who cares about good governance in this country.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    edited December 2016
    One of the more amusing of the legal questions at least, given it would need to go to the ECJ it seems.

    But I'm more interested in the report that Davis said the government doesn't know or not. That was one point on which the government lawyers and the claimants in the a50 case seemed to be in agreement on, that it was not revocable, so why introduce that element now?

    A conspiracy theorist would suggest they want more time and are in fact happy for this to provide opportunity for that delay. Surely not the case, but since the chances of the public being so overwhelming in changing their minds, and thus changing government minds, are so remote, why look doubtful? Governments always say they are sure even when they are not.
    TOPPING said:

    Hmm on first blush I have to say why on earth does it matter if it's revocable or not?

    Change our mind (horrific as that might be in terms of the deal we would get) and we can rejoin at any time plus, if we did change our minds, and if it was put to the EU27 that we wanted to reverse our position I'm sure there would be unanimity in accepting.

    So not an issue IMO.

    I think the issue is that if it were revocable and we did indeed revoke our notice to leave, we'd retain our current position, opt outs and all. Leave but then try to rejoin and we'd surely have no basis on which to argue for any special deals as might currently exist.

    And of course the point as put below that just like offering a new deal after our vote would encourage others to vote leave to get new deals, allowing revocation would be in a similar vein.
  • Scott_P said:

    Meanwhile in Scotland...

    @scottishlabour: Tonight, SNP ministers who campaigned against austerity voted with the Tories to block a 50p top rate of tax for the richest few.

    The correct decision
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn confirmed to senior Labour MPs tonight that Sinn Fein staffer Jayne Fisher will be working in his office from next month.

    Is this news ? Martin McGuiness is the Deputy Leader of Sinn Fein. He had lunch with the Queen. Should she be ashamed ? Should she abdicate ?

    Jayne Fisher, whoever she is, probably was not even born when the troubles started in NI. I don't know.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    Trigger warning: 2017 is not going to offer many safe spaces for Leavers.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Corbyn.. . The gift that keeps on giving....
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789

    Corbyn.. . The gift that keeps on giving....

    Is that gift in the German sense?
  • Trigger warning: 2017 is not going to offer many safe spaces for Leavers.

    No need for safe space for leavers
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    'A50 can’t be invoked without the country knowing whether it’s revocable or not'.

    Sorry, but this is utter twaddle imho.

    Why? This is the strategy Boris proposed in 2015.

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/06/28/schrodingers-referendum-as-boris-wants-voters-to-vote-yes-and-no-to-leaving-the-eu/
    I don’t give a damn what Boris Johnson MP said back in June.
    I'm sure he doesn't either.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    There's elections in May. Conservatives will suffer badly in these elections if Article 50 is still up in the air. There may yet be a general election on that date, if the govt find themselves in Parliamentary difficulties with an enabling Bill.

    June 23rd is the anniversary of the vote. Again, there will be lots of scrutiny on the government if nothing has actually happened a year after the vote.

    Therefore, from a political point of view, A50 is likely to be declared before June 30th. 1/2 is a bit stingy though, so no bet for me on this one.
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    surbiton said:

    Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn confirmed to senior Labour MPs tonight that Sinn Fein staffer Jayne Fisher will be working in his office from next month.

    Is this news ? Martin McGuiness is the Deputy Leader of Sinn Fein. He had lunch with the Queen. Should she be ashamed ? Should she abdicate ?

    Jayne Fisher, whoever she is, probably was not even born when the troubles started in NI. I don't know.
    The Queen probably didn't want to start the troubles again by refusing to meet him. I doubt she would employ him or have him in the office though.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    kle4 said:

    One of the more amusing of the legal questions at least, given it would need to go to the ECJ it seems.

    But I'm more interested in the report that Davis said the government doesn't know or not. That was one point on which the government lawyers and the claimants in the a50 case seemed to be in agreement on, that it was not revocable, so why introduce that element now?

    A conspiracy theorist would suggest they want more time and are in fact happy for this to provide opportunity for that delay. Surely not the case, but since the chances of the public being so overwhelming in changing their minds, and thus changing government minds, are so remote, why look doubtful? Governments always say they are sure even when they are not.

    TOPPING said:

    Hmm on first blush I have to say why on earth does it matter if it's revocable or not?

    Change our mind (horrific as that might be in terms of the deal we would get) and we can rejoin at any time plus, if we did change our minds, and if it was put to the EU27 that we wanted to reverse our position I'm sure there would be unanimity in accepting.

    So not an issue IMO.

    I think the issue is that if it were revocable and we did indeed revoke our notice to leave, we'd retain our current position, opt outs and all. Leave but then try to rejoin and we'd surely have no basis on which to argue for any special deals as might currently exist.
    Yes I suppose so but we are an important economy and I think they might have us back on decent (i.e. current) terms whenever.

    But it's all academic; we're not going back within a generation or two.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    surbiton said:

    Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn confirmed to senior Labour MPs tonight that Sinn Fein staffer Jayne Fisher will be working in his office from next month.

    Is this news ? Martin McGuiness is the Deputy Leader of Sinn Fein. He had lunch with the Queen. Should she be ashamed ? Should she abdicate ?

    Jayne Fisher, whoever she is, probably was not even born when the troubles started in NI. I don't know.
    HM isn't actually seeking to govern the country. And her efforts at reconciliation should be commended, especially after their murder of Lord Mountbatten.
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,956

    Corbyn.. . The gift that keeps on giving....

    Just when you think he's jumped the shark, he finds another and leaps right on over.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    TOPPING said:

    kle4 said:

    One of the more amusing of the legal questions at least, given it would need to go to the ECJ it seems.

    But I'm more interested in the report that Davis said the government doesn't know or not. That was one point on which the government lawyers and the claimants in the a50 case seemed to be in agreement on, that it was not revocable, so why introduce that element now?

    A conspiracy theorist would suggest they want more time and are in fact happy for this to provide opportunity for that delay. Surely not the case, but since the chances of the public being so overwhelming in changing their minds, and thus changing government minds, are so remote, why look doubtful? Governments always say they are sure even when they are not.

    TOPPING said:

    Hmm on first blush I have to say why on earth does it matter if it's revocable or not?

    Change our mind (horrific as that might be in terms of the deal we would get) and we can rejoin at any time plus, if we did change our minds, and if it was put to the EU27 that we wanted to reverse our position I'm sure there would be unanimity in accepting.

    So not an issue IMO.

    I think the issue is that if it were revocable and we did indeed revoke our notice to leave, we'd retain our current position, opt outs and all. Leave but then try to rejoin and we'd surely have no basis on which to argue for any special deals as might currently exist.
    Yes I suppose so but we are an important economy and I think they might have us back on decent (i.e. current) terms whenever.

    But it's all academic; we're not going back within a generation or two.
    Indeed. Whatever any merits of us rejoining, should that be desired, I can see politics keeping us out in any case. We were nothing but trouble after all.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Sandpit said:

    There's elections in May. Conservatives will suffer badly in these elections if Article 50 is still up in the air. There may yet be a general election on that date, if the govt find themselves in Parliamentary difficulties with an enabling Bill.

    June 23rd is the anniversary of the vote. Again, there will be lots of scrutiny on the government if nothing has actually happened a year after the vote.

    Therefore, from a political point of view, A50 is likely to be declared before June 30th. 1/2 is a bit stingy though, so no bet for me on this one.

    Agreed. If A50 isn't done by May, there will be a price to pay at the ballot box.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    Trigger warning: 2017 is not going to offer many safe spaces for Leavers.

    No need for safe space for leavers
    Clearly not the case, regrettably. We all demand some thesedays.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,869

    glw said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I'm not clear why the legal action re the revocability of Article 50 is being bought in the Irish courts.

    The mere fact that Irish courts have even the slightest relevance — if they truly do — is a good enough reason to leave the EU in my book. It's abundantly clear now that nobody has ever given any serious thought to how the EU can be left or its grip loosened. I will take any form of exit now, just get it done ASAP, we will live with the consequences.
    Many Leavers seem to be opposed to constitutional government full stop.
    I've thought all along that the ECJ would probably rule it illegal for the UK to leave the EU.

    Good evening, everybody.
  • RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    There's elections in May. Conservatives will suffer badly in these elections if Article 50 is still up in the air. There may yet be a general election on that date, if the govt find themselves in Parliamentary difficulties with an enabling Bill.

    June 23rd is the anniversary of the vote. Again, there will be lots of scrutiny on the government if nothing has actually happened a year after the vote.

    Therefore, from a political point of view, A50 is likely to be declared before June 30th. 1/2 is a bit stingy though, so no bet for me on this one.

    Agreed. If A50 isn't done by May, there will be a price to pay at the ballot box.
    Depends on who is perceived to be preventing it
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    There's elections in May. Conservatives will suffer badly in these elections if Article 50 is still up in the air. There may yet be a general election on that date, if the govt find themselves in Parliamentary difficulties with an enabling Bill.

    June 23rd is the anniversary of the vote. Again, there will be lots of scrutiny on the government if nothing has actually happened a year after the vote.

    Therefore, from a political point of view, A50 is likely to be declared before June 30th. 1/2 is a bit stingy though, so no bet for me on this one.

    Agreed. If A50 isn't done by May, there will be a price to pay at the ballot box.
    Quite. The march deadline is completely arbitrary it seems, in that while it seems we should be ready to trigger by then, if more time were needed there's no reason it couldn't be held off further, but particularly the yearly anniversary would be en embarrassing one to miss. They've been pretty insistent about march as well, seems like that one is coming no matter what.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    There's elections in May. Conservatives will suffer badly in these elections if Article 50 is still up in the air. There may yet be a general election on that date, if the govt find themselves in Parliamentary difficulties with an enabling Bill.

    June 23rd is the anniversary of the vote. Again, there will be lots of scrutiny on the government if nothing has actually happened a year after the vote.

    Therefore, from a political point of view, A50 is likely to be declared before June 30th. 1/2 is a bit stingy though, so no bet for me on this one.

    Agreed. If A50 isn't done by May, there will be a price to pay at the ballot box.
    Quite. The march deadline is completely arbitrary it seems, in that while it seems we should be ready to trigger by then, if more time were needed there's no reason it couldn't be held off further, but particularly the yearly anniversary would be en embarrassing one to miss. They've been pretty insistent about march as well, seems like that one is coming no matter what.
    Well the government have stated they will publish their plan/outline (or whatever) in Feb. I doubt they would have said that had they been less confident. Why set yourself another deadline you are going to miss?
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,274
    RobD said:

    Have any experts given their view on this, especially on which part of the treaty suggests it is revocable?

    The treaty is silent on whether A50 can be revoked. It is a matter requiring clarification by the ECJ as the treaty is obviously deficient as it stands.
  • Miss JGP, good evening.
  • AnneJGP said:

    glw said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I'm not clear why the legal action re the revocability of Article 50 is being bought in the Irish courts.

    The mere fact that Irish courts have even the slightest relevance — if they truly do — is a good enough reason to leave the EU in my book. It's abundantly clear now that nobody has ever given any serious thought to how the EU can be left or its grip loosened. I will take any form of exit now, just get it done ASAP, we will live with the consequences.
    Many Leavers seem to be opposed to constitutional government full stop.
    I've thought all along that the ECJ would probably rule it illegal for the UK to leave the EU.

    Good evening, everybody.
    There was some talk in the select committee that A50 does not only trigger the leaving process but that the EU have to agree a clear trading position with the leaving party.

    Indeed it was suggested that legal opinion should be obtained as it could make the EU have to agree trading terms for the UK during the process
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    RobD said:

    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    There's elections in May. Conservatives will suffer badly in these elections if Article 50 is still up in the air. There may yet be a general election on that date, if the govt find themselves in Parliamentary difficulties with an enabling Bill.

    June 23rd is the anniversary of the vote. Again, there will be lots of scrutiny on the government if nothing has actually happened a year after the vote.

    Therefore, from a political point of view, A50 is likely to be declared before June 30th. 1/2 is a bit stingy though, so no bet for me on this one.

    Agreed. If A50 isn't done by May, there will be a price to pay at the ballot box.
    Quite. The march deadline is completely arbitrary it seems, in that while it seems we should be ready to trigger by then, if more time were needed there's no reason it couldn't be held off further, but particularly the yearly anniversary would be en embarrassing one to miss. They've been pretty insistent about march as well, seems like that one is coming no matter what.
    Well the government have stated they will publish their plan/outline (or whatever) in Feb. I doubt they would have said that had they been less confident. Why set yourself another deadline you are going to miss?
    Indeed - March is a long time since the referendum, it would be pretty amazing to make that the date without being certain if you're not ready by then, you never will be. I was just noting there's no reason they could not in theory delay further if needed, but politically they ar eset now, so I hope they will indeed have it all up together.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    PeterC said:

    RobD said:

    Have any experts given their view on this, especially on which part of the treaty suggests it is revocable?

    The treaty is silent on whether A50 can be revoked. It is a matter requiring clarification by the ECJ as the treaty is obviously deficient as it stands.
    Is revocability the default position in such things? Or does it have to be stated? A legal expert must have published their opinion!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    There's elections in May. Conservatives will suffer badly in these elections if Article 50 is still up in the air. There may yet be a general election on that date, if the govt find themselves in Parliamentary difficulties with an enabling Bill.

    June 23rd is the anniversary of the vote. Again, there will be lots of scrutiny on the government if nothing has actually happened a year after the vote.

    Therefore, from a political point of view, A50 is likely to be declared before June 30th. 1/2 is a bit stingy though, so no bet for me on this one.

    Agreed. If A50 isn't done by May, there will be a price to pay at the ballot box.
    Quite. The march deadline is completely arbitrary it seems, in that while it seems we should be ready to trigger by then, if more time were needed there's no reason it couldn't be held off further, but particularly the yearly anniversary would be en embarrassing one to miss. They've been pretty insistent about march as well, seems like that one is coming no matter what.
    Well the government have stated they will publish their plan/outline (or whatever) in Feb. I doubt they would have said that had they been less confident. Why set yourself another deadline you are going to miss?
    Indeed - March is a long time since the referendum, it would be pretty amazing to make that the date without being certain if you're not ready by then, you never will be. I was just noting there's no reason they could not in theory delay further if needed, but politically they ar eset now, so I hope they will indeed have it all up together.
    May would use up a lot of capital delaying. Even if they were not 100% ready, I suspect they would invoke regardless and accept the slight loss of time on the two-year window. In any case, there are plenty of things we need to negotiate, so we can spend the first couple of months getting all the easy stuff out of the way.
  • Scott_P said:

    Article 50 has to be irrevocable otherwise there would be nothing to stop the UK or any other country invoking and revoking it on a regular basis to gain leverage in negotiation.

    We did this to death.

    Revoking gains zero leverage
    It's certainly been done to death. But I didn't notice everyone else agreeing with you.
  • kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    There's elections in May. Conservatives will suffer badly in these elections if Article 50 is still up in the air. There may yet be a general election on that date, if the govt find themselves in Parliamentary difficulties with an enabling Bill.

    June 23rd is the anniversary of the vote. Again, there will be lots of scrutiny on the government if nothing has actually happened a year after the vote.

    Therefore, from a political point of view, A50 is likely to be declared before June 30th. 1/2 is a bit stingy though, so no bet for me on this one.

    Agreed. If A50 isn't done by May, there will be a price to pay at the ballot box.
    Quite. The march deadline is completely arbitrary it seems, in that while it seems we should be ready to trigger by then, if more time were needed there's no reason it couldn't be held off further, but particularly the yearly anniversary would be en embarrassing one to miss. They've been pretty insistent about march as well, seems like that one is coming no matter what.
    Well the government have stated they will publish their plan/outline (or whatever) in Feb. I doubt they would have said that had they been less confident. Why set yourself another deadline you are going to miss?
    Indeed - March is a long time since the referendum, it would be pretty amazing to make that the date without being certain if you're not ready by then, you never will be. I was just noting there's no reason they could not in theory delay further if needed, but politically they ar eset now, so I hope they will indeed have it all up together.
    Indeed David Davis said to the select committee today it could be triggered earlier than the end of March
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited December 2016
    Your reminder on why Hillary lost (remember the report that they didn't campaign in Michigan and Wisconsin because they didn't want to appear weak in front of Trump? ) :

    https://twitter.com/MichaelBKelley/status/809027358959222788
    https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/809034623342809088
    https://twitter.com/_Jon_Green/status/809046880424493056
    https://twitter.com/_Jon_Green/status/809051597376524288
    "But we lost due to Russian hackers and Comey, blah blah blah"
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    isam said:

    surbiton said:

    Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn confirmed to senior Labour MPs tonight that Sinn Fein staffer Jayne Fisher will be working in his office from next month.

    Is this news ? Martin McGuiness is the Deputy Leader of Sinn Fein. He had lunch with the Queen. Should she be ashamed ? Should she abdicate ?

    Jayne Fisher, whoever she is, probably was not even born when the troubles started in NI. I don't know.
    The Queen probably didn't want to start the troubles again by refusing to meet him. I doubt she would employ him or have him in the office though.
    The Queen had no option but to act on the advice of her Ministers.

    Corbyn, on the other hand, has a choice. He was on the side of the terrorists. He wanted them to win and he voted against one of the agreements reached to try and end the Troubles. (This last comment is directed at Surbiton, who doesn't seem to understand the difference between what HMQ has to do and what the LoTo chooses to do.)



  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    Cyclefree said:

    Scott_P said:

    @PolhomeEditor: Jeremy Corbyn confirmed to senior Labour MPs tonight that Sinn Fein staffer Jayne Fisher will be working in his office from next month.

    What next? A Hamas member as his diversity officer, maybe.
    Stop giving him ideas!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Speedy said:

    Your reminder on why Hillary lost (remember the report that they didn't campaign in Michigan and Wisconsin because they didn't want to appear weak in front of Trump? ) :

    [snip]

    "But we lost due to Russian hackers and Comey, blah blah blah"

    I thought we agreed to a trigger warning before the words "ground game" appeared in a post these days... titters :D
  • Mr. Speedy, that's bloody horrendous campaigning. Clinton really should've won. Trump was damned lucky to face someone who was not only a turn-off for huge numbers of people, but whose campaign was making such obviously inept decisions.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165
    Ha! Nice to get a few seconds on unemployment falling and a "small" (i.e. above inflation) rise in average earnings on the Six O'Clock News.
  • Speedy said:

    Your reminder on why Hillary lost (remember the report that they didn't campaign in Michigan and Wisconsin because they didn't want to appear weak in front of Trump? ) :

    https://twitter.com/MichaelBKelley/status/809027358959222788
    https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/809034623342809088
    https://twitter.com/_Jon_Green/status/809046880424493056
    https://twitter.com/_Jon_Green/status/809051597376524288
    "But we lost due to Russian hackers and Comey, blah blah blah"

    And the best bit of all, if true, is that it was someone in the democratic party who leaked the e mails, not the Russians.
  • PeterC said:

    RobD said:

    Have any experts given their view on this, especially on which part of the treaty suggests it is revocable?

    The treaty is silent on whether A50 can be revoked. It is a matter requiring clarification by the ECJ as the treaty is obviously deficient as it stands.
    The Treaty is not deficient. It makes no provision for unilateral revocation. Therefore it is not available. The ECJ can only rule on what the Treaty does say, not on what it might have said.
  • RobD said:

    Have any experts given their view on this, especially on which part of the treaty suggests it is revocable?

    The Government has accepted for the purposes of the Supreme Court case that it's irrevocable. Curiously, the French government is understood to have received legal advice that it is revocable.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited December 2016
    RobD said:

    Have any experts given their view on this, especially on which part of the treaty suggests it is revocable?

    This article is quite persuasive in arguing that it is revocable:

    http://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/brexit-foundational-constitutional-and-interpretive-principles-ii/

    In particular, I found his second paragraph convincing:

    Secondly, the principle set out above is reaffirmed by Article 68 of the Vienna Convention of the Law of Treaties, VCLT, which provides that “a notification or instrument provided for in article 65 or 67 may be revoked at any time before it takes effect”. Article 65 VCLT stipulates that a state that invokes a ground for withdrawing from a treaty must notify the other parties; Article 67 VCLT determines the manner in which such notification is to be given, namely that it should be in writing.

    In essence, in the absence of anything specific in the Lisbon Treaty about revocability, he suggests that Article 68 of the Vienna Convention kicks in. IANAL, but that makes sense.

    (He also addresses the objection that a state could repeatedly invoke and revoke Article 50. Not so, because that would be an abuse of normal treaty conventions.)
  • TonyETonyE Posts: 938

    PeterC said:

    RobD said:

    Have any experts given their view on this, especially on which part of the treaty suggests it is revocable?

    The treaty is silent on whether A50 can be revoked. It is a matter requiring clarification by the ECJ as the treaty is obviously deficient as it stands.
    The Treaty is not deficient. It makes no provision for unilateral revocation. Therefore it is not available. The ECJ can only rule on what the Treaty does say, not on what it might have said.
    Not so I'm afraid : Try this for a legal opinion.

    http://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/brexit-foundational-constitutional-and-interpretive-principles-ii/

    I had a brief conversation on Twitter with George Peretz, a very pro remain QC, who pointed this out to me. AS far as he's concerned, there is no question that the Vienna convention principles cannot be overridden by the treaty - that the two are meant to be read together for interpretation purposes
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    @Morris_Dancer
    @RobD

    If you read the whole report it's even worse.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/michigan-hillary-clinton-trump-232547

    They directly attacked people who tried to help them and tried to cut them off from contacts and money.
  • Mr. Speedy, that's mind-blowingly stupid.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    AnneJGP said:

    glw said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I'm not clear why the legal action re the revocability of Article 50 is being bought in the Irish courts.

    The mere fact that Irish courts have even the slightest relevance — if they truly do — is a good enough reason to leave the EU in my book. It's abundantly clear now that nobody has ever given any serious thought to how the EU can be left or its grip loosened. I will take any form of exit now, just get it done ASAP, we will live with the consequences.
    Many Leavers seem to be opposed to constitutional government full stop.
    I've thought all along that the ECJ would probably rule it illegal for the UK to leave the EU.

    Good evening, everybody.
    We can always revoke the 1972 Act and stop sending the cheques. Messy, but preferable to being held hostage against the will of the people.

    I wonder if at some point we end up with UN mediators getting involved in Brexit, if both sides cannot amicably agree a deal?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    edited December 2016
    Jo Maugham ought to raise his case in a British Court if he feels he has one. Clearly using Dublin is a tawdry back door delaying tactic - although they're coming from a similiar angle at least Millar's case will be decided by British judges in British courts.
    Ultimately it makes no difference as to whether Art 50. is recovable or not in the (initial) serving of it, I expect the ECJ will rule irrecovability (If it gets that far) and the de-facto process of leaving will have begun by then anyway.
    There is no need for UK parliament to pay the slightest attention to a Dublin court at this point anyway.

    All a bit #NeverTrumpy.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535
    Speedy said:

    "But we lost due to Russian hackers and Comey, blah blah blah"

    I do find it wryly amusing that before the election Democrats were intensely relaxed about top secret information being exfiltrated from the Secretary of State's private email server, and dismissive of the Wikileaks publication of DNC emails as mere tittle-tattle. Now they are flipping out about Russian hackers "stealing" the election for Trump, and calling for all sorts of investigations by every three letter agency going.

    Calling them two-faced barely scratches the surface.
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    That Corbyn appt explained

    Mark Wallace
    Two more examples of new Corbyn staffer @JayneBFisher's dubious taste in political heroes - Chavez was "an exemplary human being". https://t.co/NB27kRU3sU
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    On topic:

    For God's sake, let's just get this over with.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    RobD said:

    Have any experts given their view on this, especially on which part of the treaty suggests it is revocable?

    The Government has accepted for the purposes of the Supreme Court case that it's irrevocable. Curiously, the French government is understood to have received legal advice that it is revocable.
    I think you previously mentioned on here that just because they agreed to that position for the purposes of the case, doesn't mean it is actually a legal fact! Interesting bit about the French government though, or is this secret advice similar to that received by the SNP? :p
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    RobD said:

    Have any experts given their view on this, especially on which part of the treaty suggests it is revocable?

    This article is quite persuasive in arguing that it is revocable:

    http://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/brexit-foundational-constitutional-and-interpretive-principles-ii/

    In particular, I found his second paragraph convincing:

    Secondly, the principle set out above is reaffirmed by Article 68 of the Vienna Convention of the Law of Treaties, VCLT, which provides that “a notification or instrument provided for in article 65 or 67 may be revoked at any time before it takes effect”. Article 65 VCLT stipulates that a state that invokes a ground for withdrawing from a treaty must notify the other parties; Article 67 VCLT determines the manner in which such notification is to be given, namely that it should be in writing.

    In essence, in the absence of anything specific in the Lisbon Treaty about revocability, he suggests that Article 68 of the Vienna Convention kicks in. IANAL, but that makes sense.

    (He also addresses the objections that a state could repeatedly invoke and revoke Article 50. Not so, because that would be an abuse of normal treaty conventions.)
    Thanks! But isn't the time of invocation also when it takes effect?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789

    RobD said:

    Have any experts given their view on this, especially on which part of the treaty suggests it is revocable?

    The Government has accepted for the purposes of the Supreme Court case that it's irrevocable. Curiously, the French government is understood to have received legal advice that it is revocable.
    ''Accepted' is the wrong word. It suited then not to have the question raised.
  • TonyETonyE Posts: 938
    Pulpstar said:

    Jo Maugham ought to raise his case in a British Court if he feels he has one. Clearly using Dublin is a tawdry back door delaying tactic - although they're coming from a similiar angle at least Millar's case will be decided by British judges in British courts.
    Ultimately it makes no difference as to whether Art 50. is recovable or not in the (initial) serving of it, I expect the ECJ will rule irrecovability (If it gets that far) and the de-facto process of leaving will have begun by then anyway.
    There is no need for UK parliament to pay the slightest attention to a Dublin court at this point anyway.

    All a bit #NeverTrumpy.

    It rather depends. The ECJ exists to protect the direction of the project, to uphold the ratchet. Does it help the project to lose a contributing member with a large trade surplus, or is it better to see a recalcitrant removed from the process of integration.

    This is why its difficult to see what might come of any case, but the weight of legal opinion is with revocability at present
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100

    Mr. Speedy, that's mind-blowingly stupid.

    I hope that Corbyn takes notes on what not to do in an election.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,545
    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    Sandpit said:

    There's elections in May. Conservatives will suffer badly in these elections if Article 50 is still up in the air. There may yet be a general election on that date, if the govt find themselves in Parliamentary difficulties with an enabling Bill.

    June 23rd is the anniversary of the vote. Again, there will be lots of scrutiny on the government if nothing has actually happened a year after the vote.

    Therefore, from a political point of view, A50 is likely to be declared before June 30th. 1/2 is a bit stingy though, so no bet for me on this one.

    Agreed. If A50 isn't done by May, there will be a price to pay at the ballot box.
    Quite. The march deadline is completely arbitrary it seems, in that while it seems we should be ready to trigger by then, if more time were needed there's no reason it couldn't be held off further, but particularly the yearly anniversary would be en embarrassing one to miss. They've been pretty insistent about march as well, seems like that one is coming no matter what.
    Well the government have stated they will publish their plan/outline (or whatever) in Feb. I doubt they would have said that had they been less confident. Why set yourself another deadline you are going to miss?
    Indeed - March is a long time since the referendum, it would be pretty amazing to make that the date without being certain if you're not ready by then, you never will be. I was just noting there's no reason they could not in theory delay further if needed, but politically they ar eset now, so I hope they will indeed have it all up together.
    The point of delaying is to allow negotiations to finish by the two year end date. The more prep you can do before starting the clock the more likely you are to get a better deal at the end of it. It doesn't look like they are very prepared at the moment. David Davis is canvassing industry representatives to ask what they want. It seems to be high level rather than nitty gritty stuff.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Pulpstar said:

    Jo Maugham ought to raise his case in a British Court if he feels he has one. Clearly using Dublin is a tawdry back door delaying tactic - although they're coming from a similiar angle at least Millar's case will be decided by British judges in British courts.
    Ultimately it makes no difference as to whether Art 50. is recovable or not in the (initial) serving of it, I expect the ECJ will rule irrecovability (If it gets that far) and the de-facto process of leaving will have begun by then anyway.
    There is no need for UK parliament to pay the slightest attention to a Dublin court at this point anyway.

    All a bit #NeverTrumpy.

    Why is the case being raised in an Irish court in the first place? Ridiculous!
  • glwglw Posts: 9,535

    Mr. Speedy, that's bloody horrendous campaigning. Clinton really should've won. Trump was damned lucky to face someone who was not only a turn-off for huge numbers of people, but whose campaign was making such obviously inept decisions.

    Paradoxically Clinton might have won with a "worse" campaign.
  • RobD said:

    Thanks! But isn't the time of invocation also when it takes effect?

    I think what he is saying is that triggering Article 50 is the notice in writing specified in the Vienna Convention.

    But no doubt one of our legal experts could comment more authoritatively than me on this.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    And just so we are clear, there is nothing legally preventing us invoking Article 50 even if it is not yet known if it is revocable or not?
  • TonyETonyE Posts: 938
    RobD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Jo Maugham ought to raise his case in a British Court if he feels he has one. Clearly using Dublin is a tawdry back door delaying tactic - although they're coming from a similiar angle at least Millar's case will be decided by British judges in British courts.
    Ultimately it makes no difference as to whether Art 50. is recovable or not in the (initial) serving of it, I expect the ECJ will rule irrecovability (If it gets that far) and the de-facto process of leaving will have begun by then anyway.
    There is no need for UK parliament to pay the slightest attention to a Dublin court at this point anyway.

    All a bit #NeverTrumpy.

    Why is the case being raised in an Irish court in the first place? Ridiculous!
    Because he feels that they will
    a) Be likely to suggest that he has standing
    b) be likely to kick it upstairs in time to stop the process before it begins.
This discussion has been closed.